WI Che killed early?

Supposing, within a couple of months of the Granma landing in 1956, Ernesto "Che" Guevera is killed by Bastista forces? How is the Cuban Revolution affected?

(This may overlap w a previous idea...)
 
Castro could end up a Social Democrat. Raul and Che were the Communists who eventually influenced him in that area.
 
Seeing as he was shunted off first to Congo/Zaire then Bolivia with in a few years of the Revolution, I suspect that events themselves would be similar but overall Cuban policy would have a less pro-Soviet cast. In the near term, Castro would benefit from the absence of a plausible rival, but the regime's propaganda and ability to maintain (or export) a revolutionary aura would suffer.
Good martyrs are hard to find.
 
wasn't raul actually while more military-sided, the more prosaic and less ideological driven of the two?
Yes, except for the last part. He was a Communist before Fidel was and seemed to be pretty dedicated to it. Once the two got in power the roles kind of switched though.
Oddly though, Raul always seemed the more pragmatic one to me even though he was a dedicated Communist while Castro was trying to be friendly with the United States.
 
The Cuban Revolution would still most likely succeed; Fidel always was the real driving force of that revolution; he was the one with the leadership and political shrewdness to unite all the rival anti-Batista factions into an effective unit. If anything, no Che would take a burden off of the revolution's PR, since Fidel constantly had to downplay Che and Raul's outspoken communist convictions in order to present himself as a simple democrat who was simply fighting oppression.

There may be broader cultural effects in the long run. The whole idea of "revolution" would probably seem a lot less chic among left-leaning, anti-establishment types. So many people have been swept up in the romantic fervor brought on by that photogenic face and Quixotic tale of failure and self-sacrifice. Protest movements in the years to come probably won't have the same aesthetics or mentality, being motivated less by the whole romantic, rebellious emotions that the Che image and legend inspired in lots of people. If that happened, it might actually benefit them if they had to rely more on the substance of their message.
 
The Cuban Revolution would still most likely succeed; Fidel always was the real driving force of that revolution; he was the one with the leadership and political shrewdness to unite all the rival anti-Batista factions into an effective unit. If anything, no Che would take a burden off of the revolution's PR, since Fidel constantly had to downplay Che and Raul's outspoken communist convictions in order to present himself as a simple democrat who was simply fighting oppression.

Would the US still move ahead with the Bay of Pigs?
 
IIRC, the Cuban Revolution moved towards communism after the relationship with the USA went to hell as the revolution started an agrarian reform, thus expropriating lands in American companies hands. As that reform was required to get support from the rural lower classes, I don't see it affected by Che's death, nor that chain of events interrupted.

Cuba is going communist anyway and, since it's the early 1960s we are talking about, into the Soviet sphere of influence.
 
Would the US still move ahead with the Bay of Pigs?

Most likely. Notwithstanding Fidel's long-term plans during the revolution, as juanml86 said, when the new regime began to confiscate land held by American corporations as part of its land reform program, all bets were off. Whether Fidel was pushed into communism by Raul and Che, or if he intended it all along but was way better at playing his cards close to his chest than the other two, as soon as that happened, relations were going to sour.
 
Alright, one more small question then -- say in TTL, one of the butterflies is that the US-led invasion is much more effective, leading to Castro's death by the end of 1961 (a la this).

Without Guevera, who leads the resistance, and is it even in the name of his government?
 
Last edited:
Alright, one more small question then -- say in TTL, one of the butterflies is that the US-led invasion is much more effective, leading to Castro's death by the end of 1961 (a la this).

Without Guevera, who leads the resistance, and is it even in the name of his government?
Raul Castro or Camilo Cienfuegos, if he doesn't die in ATL
 
Top